Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence and it was noted that Councillor Pritchett was currently absent.

(a)  To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 23 September 2020

(b)  To confirm the minutes of the Special Meeting held on 25 November 2020 – To follow

(a)  The minutes of the meeting held on 23 September 2020 were confirmed and authorised to be signed by the Mayor.

(b)  The minutes of the Special Meeting held on 25 November 2020 were confirmed and authorised to be signed by the Mayor.

(Councillor Pritchett entered the meeting during the confirmation of the minutes.)

A personal interest in respect of County Councillors Orson, Pearson and Posnett is noted as being on record for any matters which relate to the Leicestershire County Council.

Members to declare any interest as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting.

A personal interest in respect of County Councillors Orson, Pearson and Posnett was noted as being on record for any matters which related to the Leicestershire County Council.

Minute CO57 – Motions on Notice

Councillor Wilkinson declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in this item as his partner was a midwife at St Mary’s Birth Centre and should there be any discussion on this matter, he would leave the meeting and not take part in any vote.

Minute CO62 - Cabinet Report to Council - Business Rates Pool Funding Update - Asset Development Programme Phase 1

Councillor Posnett declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item as Chair of the Board of the Melton Learning Hub due to the organisation being based at Phoenix House.

Councillor Bindloss declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in this item as both he and his wife worked for the Melton Learning Hub and should there be any discussion on this matter, he would leave the meeting and not take part in any vote.

Bypass in the north

Councillor Holmes declared a disclosable pecuniary interest should there be any matter raised in connection with the bypass in the north and if so she would leave the meeting and not take part in any vote.

The Mayor referred to this Christmas being very quiet and different in terms of mayoral activities to previous ones and that all events had been postponed. He advised that he would be doing a reading on 103  The Eye radio channel at Christmas and referred to giving each Councillor a small memento instead of Christmas cards. He wished Councillor Smith best wishes for the birth of her baby in the new year. He expressed his pride at how the Council had risen to the challenges of 2020 and looked forward to emerging into 2021 with hope for a safer world. He wished everyone a Merry Christmas.

The Leader said

‘What a year 2020 has been. This time last year we thought Brexit was the only show in town. Little did we know what was in store…. We have been responding to an international pandemic for the last 9 months and I remain incredibly proud of what this Council, both members and officers, working with our partners and communities has achieved. We have provided humanitarian support to some of the most vulnerable people in our communities; delivering over 3,000 food parcels. We have provided over £11m to keep businesses afloat. We have saved lives and protected livelihoods. It is hard to imagine a time when Councils have undertaken more important work and I want to once again place on record my thanks to all members and officers for the work they have done during this challenging time.

I would also likely to specifically acknowledge the contribution made by our Environmental Health team over the last few months. Often going under the radar, they have played a lead role in supporting the town centre reopening, guiding and supporting our businesses, whilst also ensuring compliance with covid rules where necessary. Alongside this they continue to maintain their normal obligations and I was delighted to see the Food Standards Agency recently report that they achieved 99.3% of the interventions due in 2019/20 – placing them 16^th highest out of 353 nationally. For a small team, like many this year, they have gone over and above and continue to do Melton proud.

Despite all we have done, it clearly has not been an easy time, and I am sure we have all felt the burden this period has placed upon us, both personally and professionally.  Despite the wonders of modern technology and the great convenience of Zoom meetings, we miss the opportunity to meet face to face and recognise that normally after our December meeting, members and officers would share some food, drink and social time together. Reinforcing the strength of our Council community and our shared partnership. This year we cannot do that, but we celebrate the emergence of the vaccine and look forward to the coming months when we know that this will be possible again. Our work with the LGA provides a very timely opportunity for us all to review and reflect on what is working well and what still needs to be done, and to consider how we ensure we make the most of the talent and insights of all members and officers across the Council. I look forward to working with all colleagues on that during the early part of next year.

Alongside this we are working hard on delivering our commitment to service excellence within our new Corporate Strategy and improving how we respond. We welcome feedback when things go wrong as it helps us improve what we do. Members and officers have started discussing a new approach and I look forward to this also being agreed and finalised in the new year.  

Whatever  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO54

In accordance with the Constitution, Members of the Council may answer questions from the public of which notice has been given.

(a)  The following question was received from Kelly Davies :

On page 10 of the council's new corporate strategy, there is mention of increasing vitality, vibrancy, footfall and spend in the town centre. How does the council plan to do this when our public transport has been acknowledged by the BBC as being sub-par and many of my followers have claimed the town's car parking charges to be a killer of footfall within the town centre?

The Portfolio Holder for Growth and Prosperity (and Deputy Leader) to respond

(b)  The following question was received from Gareth Batchelor :

Can you provide details regarding the background to the decision to re-locate the Christmas tree pit in the Town Centre, including the identification of issues with the previous site and the procurement process undertaken?

Supplementary Question provided:

How long the new site is expected to last and what, if any, guarantees are in place if any remedial work has to be carried out to prevent a large expenditure again?

The Portfolio Holder for Growth and Prosperity (and Deputy Leader) to respond

In accordance with the Constitution, Members of the Council may answer questions from the public of which notice has been given.

(a)  The following question was received from Kelly Davies :

On page 10 of the Council's new Corporate Strategy, there is mention of increasing vitality, vibrancy, footfall and spend in the town centre. How does the Council plan to do this when our public transport has been acknowledged by the BBC as being sub-par and many of my followers have claimed the town's car parking charges to be a killer of footfall within the town centre?

The Portfolio Holder for Growth and Prosperity (and Deputy Leader) responded as follows:

‘Thank you for the question and also I would like to pay tribute  to you for circulating covid updates particularly amongst young people and for joining some of our seminars. As you note, as part of its new Corporate Strategy, the Council has made a commitment to delivering sustainable and inclusive growth in Melton and surround. We understand that the vibrancy of town centre is reliant on a range of factors such as quality and diversity of offer, promotion of businesses, opening hours, occupancy levels, affordability and spend capacity of the community and accessibility of the place itself. It is important that people have access to employment and as well as access to affordable housing  to improve the disposable income of our communities and this Council wants to reassure you and your followers that young people are very much at  the heart of its agenda in terms of getting them new houses and finding new jobs for the next decade to come.

It has been an extraordinary year for town centre retail and leisure particularly with significant falls in footfall due to the covid pandemic. Throughout the year, the Council has been working with the Business Improvement District and Melton Mowbray Town Estate to maintain the vitality, vibrancy, footfall and spend in the town centre. We have done this by ensuring public health  messages and infrastructure were implemented ready for the retail reopening back in June, including extensive signage, hand sanitisers, and support provided by visible Covid Ambassadors. Our regulatory services team has worked with our partners to support businesses in ensuring their shops, cafes and restaurants could open in a COVID-safe way.

Other support measures we have undertaken during the Pandemic have seen us :

·         Relax enforcement of Marquees and temporary structures to ensure those businesses who are able to can utilise outside space more effectively. This helped create more capacity to achieve social distancing guidelines whilst on the premises.

·         We supported town  centre businesses in trialling a café culture in the market place by supporting pavement licences for outdoor seating

·         We also have developed a shared seating space in the market square for businesses to utilise during the day and in the evenings.

To support footfall in the run up to Christmas, the Council has offered free parking days in key town centre car parks on every Friday  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO55

In accordance with the Constitution, a Member may ask the Leader, the Chair of the Council or a Committee Chair, a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the Borough.

No questions were received

There were no questions from Members.

In accordance with the Constitution, motions on notice must be signed by at least two Members and be about matters for which the Council has a responsibility or which affect the Melton Borough.

The following motion was received from Councillor Fisher (Seconded by Councillor Smedley and supported by Councillor Pearson):

 Proposed closure of St Mary’s St Mary's Birth Centre, Melton Mowbray. 

The Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Clinical Commissioning Group  are proposing  to close St Mary’s Birth Centre and replace it with a Midwife led birth centre at the Leicester General Hospital for a trial period of 12 months.

This current proposal needs to provide more details on how local community based births, postnatal, antenatal and other related services will be affected.

Recent Studies support the use of smaller birthing centres where care is personalised to the patient as the way forward.  Concerns have also been raised regarding the capacity at Leicester General Hospital and the ability to deal with the increased workload as a result of these proposals. Careful consideration needs to be given to access, travel time, public transport availability, parking and fuel expenses and the environmental impact before a final decision is made.

In order to recognise the concerns of the residents of the Melton Borough in relation to the proposed closure of the St Mary’s Birth Centre the Council:

(1)  Requests that the local National Health Service and LLR CCG provide more information in relation to the impact of the proposed closure on access, travel time, public transport, parking, fuel expense and environmental impact and the steps that will be taken to mitigate and monitor these impacts should the proposals go ahead.

(2)  Requests that the local National Health Service and LLR CCG provide information in relation to the feasibility of  the proposal that evidences and provides assurance regarding the way in which the new facilities in Leicester would serve the residents of Melton Mowbray better than the current established local service provided at St Mary’s.

(Councillor Wilkinson here left the meeting due to his disclosable pecuniary interest as set out at Minute CO52 above.)

In accordance with the Constitution, motions on notice must be signed by at least two Members and be about matters for which the Council has a responsibility or which affect the Melton Borough.

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Fisher :

Proposed closure of St Mary’s St Mary's Birth Centre, Melton Mowbray

The Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Clinical Commissioning Group  are proposing to close St Mary’s Birth Centre and replace it with a Midwife led birth centre at the Leicester General Hospital for a trial period of 12 months.

This current proposal needs to provide more details on how local community based births, postnatal, antenatal and other related services will be affected.

Recent Studies support the use of smaller birthing centres where care is personalised to the patient as the way forward. Concerns have also been raised regarding the capacity at Leicester General Hospital and the ability to deal with the increased workload as a result of these proposals. Careful consideration needs to be given to access, travel time, public transport availability, parking and fuel expenses and the environmental impact before a final decision is made.

In order to recognise the concerns of the residents of the Melton Borough in relation to the proposed closure of the St Mary’s Birth Centre the Council:

(1)  Requests that the local National Health Service and LLR CCG provide more information in relation to the impact of the proposed closure on access, travel time, public transport, parking, fuel expense and environmental impact and the steps that will be taken to mitigate and monitor these impacts should the proposals go ahead.

(2)  Requests that the local National Health Service and LLR CCG provide information in relation to the feasibility of  the proposal that evidences and provides assurance regarding the way in which the new facilities in Leicester would serve the residents of Melton Mowbray better than the current established local service provided at St Mary’s.

He added that he had heard nothing but praise for everyone that had used the St Marys Birth Centre and it would be a short-sighted decision to close it.

Councillor Smedley seconded the motion and stated that St Marys Birth Centre provides a valuable service to residents across the Borough. During the consultation period she had met with and heard stories of so many people that have relied on the St Marys for support during pregnancy, childbirth and after care.  The care offered is personalised with midwives knowing their patients well and this ensures a high level of confidence and satisfaction. She feared that proposed changes would have a negative impact on all new families and especially those who are more vulnerable who would have to suffer extra cost to travel for this essential service. She reported that she had  actively taken part in the consultation and understood that those in the north and north east of Leicestershire would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO57

The Portfolio Holder for Growth and Prosperity (and Deputy Leader) to present a report for Council to note the Infrastructure Funding Statement 2020 (IFS)

The Portfolio Holder for Growth and Prosperity (Deputy Leader), Councillor Higgins, moved the recommendation and introduced the report highlighting the following points :

·         This report presented a new responsibility as a result of recent changes to legislation and was the first of its kind at Full Council and set out S106 receipts received from the previous year, April 2019 to March 2020

·         Proceeds were contained within the statement itself and it had been a relatively quiet year in these terms

·         Much more could be expected from hereon as larger schemes would start to impact in these reports

·         Significant affordable housing had  been secured which would be delivered as developments proceeded and this would enable the Council  to make inroads into this priority

·         Of great significance was the wider role of the Council’s Committees and Officers in the negotiation of S106s with LCC as the main beneficiaries. Funding was secured by the Local Planning Authority and Planning Officers had so far secured 99% plus which demonstrated the Council’s commitment and consistency towards essential infrastructure funding for the southern bypass and the northern and eastern bypass

·         Large sums had already been secured for the MMDR and  education and affordable housing remained key components of the s106 and the Council could report strong performance not only in meeting the local plan targets but exceeding them in a small number of cases

·         Some Councillors particularly Councillor Browne had secured voluntary contributions to affordable housing in his ward. The benefits of local direct negotiations between the Parish Council, Ward Councillor and developer that brought such benefits especially for young people were highlighted

·         It was noted that a wide range of affordable housing in both geographical terms as well as tenureship meant the Council was addressing the needs of all parts of the community  who were in need of affordable housing. He referred to previously affordable housing had been affordable rent or shared ownership but now the Council was securing not only starter homes for young people and first time buyers up to the age of 40 but also discount housing and this housing would be discounted for people with a local connection in perpetuity

·         It was noted that the Council was securing funds for new medical facilities in Melton Mowbray in pursuant of the promise in the new Corporate Plan

·         The work of communities and Parish Councils in particular was acknowledged so that they could be the recipricant of benefits of development at a local level eg. Funding for village halls funds and play equipment. He referred to  good examples of voluntary contributions in rural wards especially Long Clawson and Stathern.

Councillor Orson seconded the motion.

RESOLVED

That Council:

Notes the Infrastructure Funding Statement 2020 (IFS) so that it can be published on the Council’s website.

The Chair of Scrutiny to seek approval from the Council for an Executive Scrutiny Protocol

The Chair of the Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Cumbers,  moved the recommendation and provided a brief introduction as follows:

·         There had been much work in the drafting of the protocol which had included workshops, research from other authorities and considered feedback from Scrutiny and Cabinet Members

·         The purpose of the protocol was to clarify the role of the Scrutiny Committee to provide a framework to define relationships and set out expectations so that scrutiny could function in a positive way

·         The document stated that the key purpose of the protocol was to clarify the relationship between the Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committee to encourage effective communication between the two to enable and enhance the scrutiny function in delivering positive outcomes in line with its objectives. Amongst other things the protocol provided information on the way the Scrutiny Annual Workplan would be formed, the format of scrutiny reviews and how matters would be referred to Cabinet and attendance by Portfolio holders at the Scrutiny Committee

·         The document was not a statutory requirement but was identified in the government’s Statutory Guidance on Overview and Scrutiny  as  a matter of good practice

·         As Chair she had worked with the Scrutiny Committee Members, the Leader and Officers of the Council to develop a document which provided a framework for a collaborative, constructive and proactive approach to the scrutiny executive relationship

·         She hoped Members would support the protocol for inclusion in the Constitution and see it as a positive step on the Council’s scrutiny journey

·         She considered the document would also help public understanding of the scrutiny role

Councillor Orson seconded the motion and reserved his right to speak.

Councillor Evans requested that the document be revisited following the LGA review if necessary to make any amendments that are suggested and asked the proposer to accept the following addition to the recommendation as follows:

‘Upon completion of the review of the LGA of Melton Borough Council the protocol be revisited to ensure that it meets any suggestions that are made or any recommendations that are made.’

Councillor Cumbers did not accept the additional wording and felt there was no need to add to the motion.

Councillor Pritchett spoke in support of the additional wording and advised he would vote against if the additional wording was not accepted. His concerns related to the lack of reference to risk, business plans, corporate objectives and prioritising work at paragraph 3 which he considered left the protocol open to interpretation and could limit the role of scrutiny. He was also concerned that there was no reference to the personal qualities and responsibilities of the Chair and Members of the Scrutiny Committee as well as how the Chair was selected. He also considered that Internal Audit should audit the performance of scrutiny and therefore would have expected them to have audited the draft protocol against guidance and national best practice and report their findings. He was concerned at the timing of the protocol with the outcome of LGA governance review  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO59

There are no recommendations or reports from Committees

There were no recommendations and reports from Committees.

To receive a report from the Cabinet on recommendations referred to the Council

Councillor de Burle, Portfolio Holder for Finance and Resources, moved the recommendations and provided a brief introduction as follows:

·         The mid-year Treasury Management report was a requirement of the Council’s financial reporting procedures

·         It provided a summary to Council of Treasury Management activities to the end of September 2020

·         Treasury Management was the process of managing funds which were not currently needed which could be put to good use by being invested to generate income

·         Officers customary success had contributed significantly over recent years

·         Capital investment decisions were guided by two codes; the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management and the CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities. Through these regulations issued under the Local Government Act 2003, the Council was required to rigorously apply both in its treasury management activities and that additionally the Council was to receive a regular report on the outcomes of those activities

·         The report included 2 appended documents; being the Treasury Management Report which included an overview of the prevailing conditions, the recommendations and  Appendix A being the  Treasury Management Statement

·         In the Treasury Management Report, items 4.0 to 4.7, dealt with prevailing conditions for example a summary of the Covid 19 impact on the Council’s investments

·         Members may be interested to note at paragraph 4.8.1 there was a proposal was being developed for Members’ consideration for a £1m investment to reduce cost pressures on the homeless budget to provide a better service as outlined

·         With regard to Appendix A, the Treasury Management Statement, it stated that CIPFA issued revised management codes which came into effect in the 2021 fiscal year which strengthened the control of public finance to protect financial sustainability, provision of services and management of risk

·         The Council operated to achieve a balanced budget and part of the treasury management operation sought to ensure that cash flow was properly managed to secure that outcome

·         At 3.1, there was a wide ranging economic update which was still being largely influenced by the Covid situation and was uncertain. There was a lot about the quantity of easing and potential for unemployment. The most optimistic point was that the forecast showed by quarter 3 in 2022, the economy was expected to expand quickly and the CPI to be above 2%

·         At 3.2, there was reference to public works loan interest rates where there were marginal 2% loans in the longer term loans over the two years, March 2021 to March 2023 and lower investment returns in the UK and around the world’s markets

·         5.1 set out the position on prudential indicators the revised estimate on capital expenditure with HRA and non-HRA raising the bar by about £800k over the original estimates

·         5.2 explained how that change would be met from resources the Council had access to being capital receipts, capital grants, capital reserves and revenue

·         5.3 and 5.4 indicated that the Council’s capital funding requirement should not change from the original estimate of £31.49m which was well within the Council’s authorised  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO61

To receive a report from the Cabinet on recommendations referred to the Council

(Councillors Bindloss and Posnett here left the meeting due to their interests declared at Minute CO52.)

The Portfolio Holder for Growth and Prosperity (Deputy Leader), Councillor Higgins, moved the recommendations and provided a brief introduction as follows:

·         A clerical correction was pointed out at recommendation 2.1, which should read Section 9 and not Section 10 as set out in the report

·         A presentation had been made to the Scrutiny in June 2019. A report was approved by the Cabinet  in April 2020 and had been mentioned explicitely in the Corporate Strategy and there had been updates throughout its journey

·         This was the next stage of the review of Council owned sites to asses their development potential

·         The report’s intention was not to close down any service or any operation, nor force any organisation or asset to move out of any building or asset, it was not proposing to close Phoenix House

·         The report proposed to draft a design for Parkside to best use the space available taking account of current occupiers’ intentions to move out of the building, this would enable the Council to then rationalise its own position with all its assets

·         There was a proposal to relocate Me and My Learning to The Cove which was currently vacant

·         The report did not ask the Council to sell or  sell or develop any property but to start considering plans for the future

·         Following approval of this report, the proposals would return to Cabinet later in the year

·         It was considered that scrutiny could add value to the process in assessing the business case as well as how any proposals would affect those who need and use those services

·         He made it clear that notice had not been served on any tenants and no tenants had been asked to leave

·         With regard to the Cattle Market north site, this had stood vacant for over 10 years but could provide capital receipts and there was a possibility to develop the site for providing housing for first time buyers

·         The Council was looking to achieve a financially sustainable model with limited risk and secure external grant funding. The project may involve the redesign of Parkside and Phoenix House site

·         Leicestershire County Council (LCC) had given notice to leave Parkside in 2021 and office space was currently not in demand due to Covid. The Council had to reassess its assets to retain income and reduce operational costs generally

Councillor Orson seconded the motion.

During debate the following points were noted:

·         It was appropriate to be taking stock of the Council’s assets as the Council was short of money

·         All options should be considered before making a decision  so that the Council was well informed and gave the best value for its residents

·         It had been requested that the proposals would be reviewed by Scrutiny. If added to the workplan Scrutiny would then report to Cabinet and/or Council

·         Due to LCC leaving Parkside at the end of 2021, it was important to take  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO62

To receive a report from the Cabinet on recommendations referred to the Council for determination

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Communities, Councillor Pearson, moved the recommendations and provided a brief introduction as follows:

·         A report was presented to the Cabinet in September 2019 which advised the need for investment in the site due to the deterioration of the playing surface

·         Atkins were authorised by the Cabinet for clarifying the funding arrangements of the investment required and assurances of the financial sustainability of the tennis provision of this Council owned asset

·         Working closely with Melton Mowbray Tennis Club, the Council’s Sports Team has secured just under £39k grant funding and has clarified this investment that the Tennis Club will be able to make including significant  fund-raising

·         This has reduced the level of investment needed by the Council into the facility from estimated £40k to £9.4k

·         As part of the overall investment of £113k (including project and management costs) working in partnership with Council Officers, the Lawn Tennis Association and the Tennis Club has provided a maintenance plan covering the use of the sinking funds both for the court replacement and in future and other ongoing yearly maintenance

·         The contractual arrangements of the Council owned site will be rationalised and the Council will enter a 24 year lease with the Melton Mowbray Tennis Club to include the usual rent reviews and break clauses to protect both parties

·         By adding the project to this year’s Capital Programme would allow for the works to finish on time for the start of the new tennis season in 2021

·         The approval of the £113k to the Capital Programme for 2021 and most of this was from the Lawn Tennis Association, the Council’s  contribution being £9.4k from capital receipts to support the remaining cost of delivering the project

Councillor Orson seconded the motion.

During debate the following points were noted :

·         The 24 year lease was considered to be comfortable for the club to manage against the investment

·         The town already had a long-standing tennis club in the town being Hamilton Tennis Club but the Melton Sports Village Tennis Club was already a very successful club and worked mainly with young people and much of the improvements had already been done. The club had hundreds of young people involved which kept them active and healthy and off the streets

·         The Council’s input was very small. If the Council did not support the scheme then the facility would deteriorate and be closed

·         There was tribute to the Sports Working Group at King Edward and how this project had developed from an obsolete and dangerous facility to a thriving tennis club

·         There were break clauses in the lease to ease any risk on both sides

·         It was confirmed monitoring would be in place however the Council was not liable for any default on payments as the funding arrangement was with the club’s trustees direct

·         It was noted that the membership was very cheap for children

·         The asset would continue to belong to the Council

·         Tribute was made to previous Deputy Chief Executive, Keith  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO63